Listowners-L ArchivesArchiver > Listowners > 2000-08 > 0966795190
From: "D. B. von Ting" <>
Subject: Re: Help!
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:13:10 -0700
References: <399FF712.7CDC15AF@softhome.net> <39A008FA.firstname.lastname@example.org>
I read your message carefully and feel that you have some good points;
however, in the case of my three lists (and many others), I'm not sure they
are relevant. Each of mine was started and advertised by me in an effort to
provide a resource for any other researchers in those specific sur-names.
To date very few have subscribed and fewer post. I am not interested in
pushing people only in providing a vehicle for them to use if they choose to
avail themselves of the service.
I probably would be one of those you have classified as an "Absentee
Listowner". I make a point of answering any message I can and encouraging
those who do post, but I will not start a thread just for the sake of using
Dennis at Table Rock
----- Original Message -----
From: "Helen" <>
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2000 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: Help!
> Josh and ALL,
> I am replying to the full list for three reasons: (1) you
> posted to the full list; (2) you have touched on two
> issues that have bothered me for a long time, both
> appropriate for this forum, i.e. and 'Whose List is it
> Anyway?' and Absentee Listownership.
> ABSENTEE LISTOWNERSHIP
> As a listowner, I find that administering two small genealogy
> mail lists requires two to four hours daily. This time includes:
> research to answer queries to which no one else has replied;
> building and maintenance of list membership at a level consistent
> with the surname frequency and distribution in the general
> population; encouraging a steady dialog: and less than one percent,
> in dealing with bounces and other "mechanical" problems.
> When I adopted the two lists, I felt this was my commitment to
> list members and potential list members. The results have been
> overwhelming. For one thing, I make sure that there is a
> steady flow of On-Topic postings.
> I belong to several lists that do well to average a dozen
> postings a year, and a few, less than that. These are lists
> that should be active. IF the listowner does not have the
> time or inclination, to motivate list members, than why not
> step down and let someone else manage the list.
> Helen Gant Donald